[Xastir] UDP frames

[Wes Johnston]

Heck, lets pick UDP port 14439 ....

That _is_ different than TCP 14439, right?  so if an internet server using
connected frames were to exist on 14439, it would be TCP mode, and therefore
different.

Jason, you got it!  802.11 stuff is cheaper than 2m radios and TNCs, even if we
had to have 3 a/points at a site.... imagine... a point to point link of these
systems in a town... alternating between channels 1 and 6 (because they are in
the ham band, and we can run higher power there with the MAC address set to our
6digit callsign ascii codes), and channel 11 set aside as a user port.  Users
wandering around town with PDAs would always be on channel 11 and would wander
in and out of coverage areas.

Or if topography permitted, you could do a hub and spoke with one central node
transmitting UDP frames on , say channel 1 to all other nodes (nodes with
beams) and the downstream nodes would have one access point for rx/tx with the
main node and a 2nd AP for the clients to use on channel 11.

Hi hihi... it'd work with winlink (err POP and SMTP) too... hee hee... on the
same "channel"...
Wes
--



Quoting Jason Winningham <jdw at eng.uah.edu>:

>
> On Jan 10, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Curt Mills wrote:
>
> > It might be more useful with an
> > 802.11 network set up for a smaller event, where officials could
> > keep track of the event on laptops with 802.11 cards, and the actual
> > trackers would be on ham APRS.  In that case you don't need UDP
> > though.
>
> Maybe come up with a well-known UDP port, then let APRS tracker
> applications treat UDP/IP port 255.255.255.255:xyz as an interface.
> 802.11 "trackers" (PDAs, etc) could deploy with non-ham mobile assets,
> 802.11 access point stations could link them to an RF gate, either a
> gate at each AP, or maybe network the IP back to a single gate for RF
> distribution?  802.11 trackers would update only when in range, e.g.
> checkpoints, mile/kilometer markers, etc.  Gate 802.11 to RF and vice
> versa, and everyone gets the big picture, and non hams can use APRS on
> 802.11.
>
> I like it. Is there a port, well-known or othwerwise, in use for APRS?
> Maybe we could just define one, and define the format, which should
> probably be just AX.25 (sans sentinels) dropped in the UDP payload.
>
> Of course, there's the callsign issue when gating to RF.  Also IP
> addressing: subnet broadcast, all subnets broadcast, global broadcast,
> or multicast?
>
> Heck, I could probably get hardware so set one up here just to play
> with.  Anybody know how far you can reasonably cover an area with an
> 802.11 card/amp/interface combination?
>
> In my enthusiasm for a project more interesting that what I'm doing
> right now (:, what am I missing?
>
> -Jason
> kg4wsv
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xastir mailing list
> Xastir at xastir.org
> https://lists.xastir.org/mailman/listinfo/xastir
>